Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Emerson v. Corizon Inc.

United States District Court, D. Arizona

April 16, 2019

Anthony Eric Emerson, Plaintiff,
v.
Corizon Incorporated, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          HONORABLE DAVID C. BURY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This case having been stayed for 90 days and now returned to the Court's active docket, a case management scheduling conference was held on April 9, 2019. The Court reviewed the parties' Joint Case Management Report, and they agreed to proceed as follows:

* The Defendants may immediately refile their previously filed dispositive motion, which this Court denied as moot when it entered the stay.
* The Plaintiff may file a Motion to Amend the Complaint.
* Subsequent to both motions being fully briefed the Court shall rule, and in the event, this matter proceeds thereafter the case shall proceed as a standard track case, LRCiv. 16.2(b)(2)(B), as follows:

         IT IS ORDERED

         that the parties abide by the following schedule and rules:

         1. Initial disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a) have been completed.

         2. The Plaintiff shall disclose any expert witnesses and reports to the Defendant on or before: 3 months after disposition of the above referenced motions. The Defendant shall have 30 days from the date of Plaintiff's expert witness disclosure to disclose any experts and their reports. Plaintiff may have 15 days, thereafter, to disclose any rebuttal expert opinions.

         3. Discovery shall be completed by: 6 months after disposition of the above referenced motions.

         Counsel are reminded that they are not to file the actual disclosures with the Court, just the notices of disclosure, pursuant to the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Local Rules), LR Civ.5.2. Discovery is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in regard to limitations on interrogatories and depositions. Leave of Court is required for any divergence from the federal rules. Interrogatories must be submitted sufficiently in advance to permit the opposing party to answer before the discovery deadline, thereby giving the party submitting the interrogatories sufficient time to undertake discovery made necessary by the answers.

         In the event of a dispute over discovery matters, the parties' attorneys are cautioned to first engage in personal consultation regarding the dispute and to make a sincere effort to resolve the conflict. See Local Rule 7.2(j). Counsel should act to resolve discovery disputes quickly. If such efforts fail, Counsel should then jointly call the Judge's law clerk to arrange a schedule for resolving the dispute expeditiously.

         4. Dispositive motions shall be filed by: 30 days following the close of discovery. Counsel are reminded that all motions, memoranda, and pleadings submitted for the Court's review and decision must comply with the filing, time, and form requirements of the Local Rules.

         Pursuant to LR Civ. 7.2(i), failing to file the requisite responsive memorandum or failing to appear at oral argument may be deemed a consent to the granting or denial of a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.